How A Second American Civil War Could Start WW3

A second American civil war has been on many people's minds, and so has the possibility for WW3. Between tensions within the United States among Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives, and the left and the right, as well as the conflicts abroad, Russia's invasion of Ukraine, Israel's was with Hamas, and the risk of China invading Taiwan, could the collapse of American stability be all it takes for World War 3 to break out? This is how a 2nd American Civil War could start WWIII.
0:00 How A Second American Civil War Could Start WW3 Intro
2:26 Hypothetical 2024 Election & Reaction
4:53 War Breaks Out
🪶Donate to Monsieur Z on Patreon: / membership
🎖️Donate to Monsieur Z on KZbin: / @monsieurdean
👕 Buy Monsieur Z Merchandise: us-of-z-shop.creator-spring.com/
📘 Monsieur Z on Facebook: / 100086678611994
✴️ Visit the Official Monsieur Z Reddit Page: / mrz_official
👾Monsieur Z on X: / us_of_z
#civilwar #ww3 #russiaukrainewar

[@robertalaverdov8147]

As someone whose been throughout the US and chatted with both sides of the political spectrum. And came here after growing up in a region wrecked by war. I can honestly say that Americans don't have the stomach and in many cases the physical ability to get off the couch for such an endeavor. This is one of those things that people talk about but will never do. Like saying you can fight a bear or a shark, unarmed. I'm being dead serious though. I just don't see the type of absolute hatred and animosity between people that is so common in other conflicts. Nor the Will to Sacrifice their lifestyle and risk life and limb. Americans are just too spoiled. This does not bode well for Americas foreign policy in facing a determined adversary overseas. But it is the hard truth.

[@MonsieurDean]

You are correct,

[@Ksim3000]

You know I have read this type of comment for years now. "Americans are too fat and lazy to do anything. It'll never happen." Yet never say never. All it takes is for one major black Swan event to rally people around something and chaps ensues. America sort of reminds me of the Europe in the summer of 1914. Back then Europe had pretty much successfully industrialised and combatted a lot of the problems affecting it during the 19th century. People had food, medicine and life rolled on. Yet European societies had started to grow... "Bored" So to say and economic recessions down the pipeline only served to fuel the frustration with the status quo. They had a lot of events from 1900 - 1914 that could have led to WW1 but they kept being defused through diplomacy. Yet one day, an arch Duke gets shot and Europe finally had enough and went to war. Millions of Europeans cheered their armies, grateful for some excitement and believing it would be all over soon, that they would smash the enemy and good times were right around the corner. Yet we saw how that played out. Americans are very much in the same mindset. They expect at this point another civil war, they think it will end the current status quo and bring about brighter times ahead for them. Little do they know what to expect, as Europe learned.

[@ShiramuUltraDelta]

​Valid point! 🎉 @@Ksim3000

[@robertalaverdov8147]

@@Ksim3000 Yes but Europe as a whole had centuries of hatred for one another built up and engrossed by rabid nationalism. And spoiler alert, people have learned that war isn't all daisies and sunshine. To ask Americans to just go grab a weapon and attack their neighbors down the street because they voted for someone they didn't is just nonsensical. At best it's possible that a large scale secession or civil war is possible after a long period of economic decline brought about by some sort of catastrophic event, several failed wars, and or debt default to name a few. Or all of the above. But as things stand now its just not realistic.

[@robertalaverdov8147]

@@Ksim3000 (Ok let's try this again. You tube seems to be censoring me) Yes but Europe as a whole had centuries of hatred for one another built up and engrossed by rabid nationalism. And spoiler alert, people have learned that war isn't all daisies and sunshine. To ask Americans to just go after their neighbors down the street because they voted for someone they didn't is just nonsensical. At best it's possible that a large scale secession or civil war is possible after a long period of economic decline brought about by some sort of catastrophic event, several failed wars, and or debt default to name a few. Or all of the above. But as things stand now its just not realistic.

[@benjackson1454]

The Mexican Army doesn't even have control over Mexico...

[@Snowthree]

Aye. But at the same time, no one expects the Mexican Inquisition.

[@LanderKoenig]

And? It will probably have a field day in a divided United States ripping itself apart

[@jemm113]

@@LanderKoenig nnnnnnn…no. Texas alone is too militarized and a key point on the border is Fort Bliss. Not to mention armed populations.

[@LanderKoenig]

@@jemm113 well it’s Texas, I wasn’t expecting em to storm the fortress of the south, just to be a bit more effective than some lightly armed civilians

[@andreslujan3246]

Ya the Mexican government gets its ass kicked by the cartels, tbh there would be a civil war in Mexico if one in the USA happened to

[@insaneadem5014]

I had this conversation with a few friends. Why wouldn't America's enemies take advantage of a fractured United States?

[@romaingallagher1100]

Why only ennemies? Some allies could profite of this too imao

[@iamasalad9080]

​@@romaingallagher1100How? They'd lose out on vital US military protection.

[@deuslaudetur2451]

@@iamasalad9080they already have, in a civil war all us military assets would be recalled back

[@theodoremccarthy4438]

The honest answer is "they'll have their own problems."

[@acarroll6842]

Nah they would totally just stay out of it for no aparent reason

[@OstojaSRB]

You forgot the potential Serbian expansion in the Balkans and their attempt to get a corridor with Russia, cuz they would 100% try such a thing

[@thetechguychannel]

I live in Romania and have been a consultant for companies and suppliers in the Balkans since the outbreak of war in Donbass in 2014. Serbia would first have to betray strategic partners of theirs, including Romania, to try such a move. Doing something like this would destabilize them a lot more than it would look from the outside. There's a special relationship they've had with Romania going back more than a century, from their secession from the Ottoman Empire all the way up to the Kosovo crisis. Jeopardizing that is unthinkable for a lot of politicians who have in the past leveraged this relationship to help keep the peace. Not to mention that the lights would go out overnight if they did something like this, since they depend A LOT more on Romania for energy and petroleum than on Russia. That's why shortly after the outbreak of the war in Ukraine they threw their little pro-Russia tantrum and then shut up after a few months. They are not the ones holding the cards in this region.

[@TheSwedishHistorian]

probably not, what they might do though is invade Bosnia and reunite with Republika Srbska

[@propagandalf9511]

@@TheSwedishHistorian We'd probably rush Kosovo to reclaim it and we don't bother with Republika Srpska.

[@constantinethecataphract5949]

Also Turkey and Greece going to war because the leash that is NATO cannot be enforced without the USA.

[@krishthakar6661]

Serbia Strong!

[@gregbilotta2472]

So if WW3 occurs, Quebecois secession will exist.....sacrebleu

[@FedericoGrimaudo]

Mon dieu!! 🤯

[@lervish1966]

Oh, des foof

[@lliamreusser4534]

I would rather live in an independent Québec then New England and I’m Canadian

[@MrMirville]

Louisiana will never accept to be part of a Maga America and rather turn into a Blue Blues Black republic.

[@alejandroalonso5386]

@@lliamreusser4534you can join New Spain

[@celestialhylos7028]

Average Human Disagreement

[@DrFumiya]

Calmest human disagreement.

[@HomelessInternetTroll]

Yea

[@meathooksmcgee662]

😂

[@justagamer5932]

As a human i can confirm this happens a lot

[@user-iu8kz3hc5p]

you forgot the red counties in blue states. in the west there is already a movement to succeed from these states

[@Wendeta-hq2cp]

Yeah if we look at the county map its basically blue dots in a sea of red so I don't know what he's talking about.

[@mikvan9849]

​@Wendeta-hq2cp populations fight wars, not land. Yes, the countryside is more competent when it comes to handling firearms and such, but the cities have the manpower. Without the ability to resupply or produce armament rural resistance will fall. The North beat the South cause of manpower and material, not because the average Northerner was more combat proficient than the average Southerner.

[@Wendeta-hq2cp]

@@mikvan9849 The North won because it had able people. The able people today are not in the city mate. Not even close. Also what manufacturing? The ones in C h i n a? The cities will just s t a r v e anyway without the rural areas. No need to fire a single b u l l e t. The cities need the farms more than the farms need the cities.

[@BigTomInTheBasement]

@@Wendeta-hq2cp and the food producing farms are nowhere near the cities. The USD value will crater the moment any real trouble begins. The massive food production we have nowadays is totally reliant on diesel fuel. No money = no oil imports. Farms will have significantly reduced output, same with refineries. Rural areas will be fairly self-sufficient where water is available without diesel pumps. Elsewhere will be bad.

[@elterga6224]

@@mikvan9849that’s assuming city dwellers would have the will to fight. Also states like California have extremely sizable republican populations despite being in a sea of blue. California would definitely be the biggest hurdle for any invading force, but luckily they would have a pleasant time making it to the city centers as the country side of California is on its east.

[@ivanarnold6674]

The majority of the uniformed armed services would cease to exist in the military if it were to ever come to an actual war. The high-ranking military members lean left, but the mid and lower level members(the ones with physical access to armories, equipment, and vehicles) lean right. It would be a brutal crapshow

[@majorsynthqed7374]

Not true. The officer corps from top to bottom is about 2/3 conservative.

[@Matt_Alaric]

@@majorsynthqed7374 Other than wishful thinking do you have anything to back that up?

[@majorsynthqed7374]

@@Matt_Alaric Yes, my experience as a Marine Corps veteran.

[@Matt_Alaric]

@majorsynthqed7374 Source: trust me bro Yeh, nah. The proof of my own eyes is worth more than the word of someone anonymous on the Internet.

[@majorsynthqed7374]

@@Matt_Alaric Don't really give a shit what you believe. I've been there, my son IS there. You are free to live in your own fantasy. No judgment from me.

[@amfnyc]

Precisely what I needed to see while relaxing in the beach during my vacation. Only good things ahead…

[@MonsieurDean]

Enjoy your time, pal. Tomorrow is never a guarantee.

[@amfnyc]

@@MonsieurDean of course, hope for the best, prepare for the worst. Good content by the way, keep it up :))

[@mastererik323]

That reminds me of a good book called "On the Beach" by Nevil Shute where he portrays a nuclear apocalypse from an Australian perspective.

[@amfnyc]

@@mastererik323 that sounds like a great read, I’ll definitely have to check that out. Thanks for the recommendation!

[@hismajesty6272]

Lovely. Hope you have fun.

[@Bio2Baby]

We did it Patrick! We saved Western Civilization!

[@blueberet0]

It'd very interesting to see what the UN would do in such a scenario, assuming it hasn't collapsed by then.

[@monsieurcharcutier4490]

Side with blue america

[@Mattineu]

They would send a very strongly worded letter to Trump.

[@ibtaba]

They would be voting to help about the time it was all over.

[@RedcoatHistory-gj7xf]

They would send peacekeeping troops in to preform many stern acts of finger wagging

[@CantoniaCustoms]

@@monsieurcharcutier4490 Promptly before collapsing lmao.

[@TR-zx1lc]

Imagine thinking the Democrats could ever tame Eastern Oregon, Eastern Washington, or Idaho.

[@MapShiba]

​@@MrHellknightimpHe's actually been pretty unbiased when it comes to realism. He's stated before that the right wing just can't win a civil war.

[@CETGale]

@@MapShiba But the Blue haired trans communist would win..?? Lmao

[@Mateo-oq7ui]

its pretty easy you just shoot at the people that shoot at you, plus in a case of open war where virtually all naval and airforce bases in the west coast are under rebel control (admittedly under a rather unrealistic assumption of federal incompetence) the militias over there would end up forced to retreat into the mountains like the taliban in 2001

[@constantinuslefug2874]

@@MapShiba Ukraine, Afghanistan, Ireland, Myanmar, & Syria have proven that this isn't the 20th century anymore. There is a strong defenders advantage & insurgents are more empowered than ever before. He's just wrong.

[@adamnesico]

@@MrHellknightimpYou despise the people that makes food for you. Why you don’t stop importing food and do it by yourself?

[@ss-oq9pc]

Interesting video, but I think you vastly overestimated Mexico's capabilities, they don't even have a main battle tank. South Korea and Japan would make nukes if they suddenly thought they couldn't rely on ours. Even if only one of them could manage it, they'd give some to the other asian countries they were allied with.

[@cherokeevolfusa2891]

Yeah, Mexico would likely see their own Civil War against the cartels pop off in this scenario. I doubt they would be in a position to support anyone.

[@lastwolflord]

I think he over estimates who strong he thinks Canada is. Their trash socialist government has practically waged a war against it's own people for over a decade. Good luck keeping the Northeast from falling.

[@diablo55]

I agree. I also think Poland and potentially Germany would also begin developing nukes if the US can no longer be relied upon

[@Galletas-my3sv]

Do you think the Chinese are unintelligent? They tried to take down Taiwan and South Korea as quickly as possible, and would use nuclear weapons before the Japanese could do anything. And Mexico would never intervene. Except that the political party that wins the elections in Mexico 2024 does not have common sense

[@Galletas-my3sv]

​@@diablo55They wouldn't need them, Russia, Belarus and Serbia do not have the capacity to invade the European Union, Britain and France have nuclear weapons.

[@familygene9030]

There are no Blue States only Blue cities . As Governor Abbott stated that the USA was a bowl of red strawberries with a handful of blueberries thrown in .

[@wolfwarrior9451]

I find it hard to imagine the Euro and Asian US allies supporting anyone other than who is the 'official' US Gov, not only because that Gov would be the one a part of Nato and other Treaties, but no one would want to upset the status quo too much. Now if BOTH sides seceded for some reason, like the election not producing a winner and congress becoming deadlocked, and the US gov becomes unable to act, that could cause a scenario similar to this

[@matthiuskoenig3378]

i mean germany and france are treaty bound to sanction ukraine (due to the minsk agreement), but they don't infact quite the opposite. Treaties don't really mean anything

[@wolfwarrior9451]

@@matthiuskoenig3378 they do when you rely on that nation for a nuclear umbrella

[@ryanbrooks5482]

The biggest flaw in the video is about Europe. They’re going through similar political issues, and the far right is surging in a lot of countries over there. Theres a good chance far governments will control some governments in Europe. I also think people are greatly overestimating russia power. They’re struggling against a much weaker neighbor that they share a flat border with. They would be slaughtered by just Germany and Poland the rest of Europe is overkill.

[@CantoniaCustoms]

This scenario is basically if the winner of the 2024 election not being clear, therefore both USes being "legitimate"

[@stuart4341]

one of the arguments is that the eu wil back the democrats because they need the democrats to fund their militaries and support them with aid, if those eu countries can't even protect and supply themselves, how are they going to fund their side in the US civil war, waht would even be the point in that sense anyways

[@archelon1012]

If Trump won and Democrats tried to secede (which I highly doubt, even California isn't that stupid), most foreign governments would likely support the US federal government, if they got involved at all. The federal government controls the military and foreign trade, so most countries would not want to risk alienating them, especially if they are at war with Russia, China, or Iran. The only country I can see siding with the secessionists would be Canada, but even then I don't see them deploying any troops within the US. I think the most likely civil war scenario is Trump wins, Democrats remove him with a coup, and then the military is split on whether they loyally put down the resulting Republican insurgencies, or defend democratic principles and try to counter-coup the Democrats. Any other scenario, including the one mentioned in the video, would just be the elected president declaring martial law to put down isolated insurgent groups. Even this is unrealistic, though, as Democrats likely aren't organized enough to carry out a successful coup.

[@Wendeta-hq2cp]

Most correct comment I've read on this. You are absolutely correct.

[@adamnesico]

That democrats aren’t organized? They have organized the society.

[@Chris-Smith]

You cant control foreign trade if you dont control the ports and world leaders hate trump as trump is trying to remove the US from NATO so they would likely not help him in a worst case scenario

[@theodoremccarthy4438]

It wouldn't be a Democratic coup so much as an establishment coup. Intel would fabricate evidence of some misdeeds on Trump's part. The FBI would claim to believe it. Trump and his VP would be killed "resisting arrest", with Speaker Johnson (who has already proven to be controllable) taking the Presidency. FBI field offices and federal buildings across the country would come under attack from outraged conservatives in retaliation to Trump's extrajudicial execution. Local insurgencies would spring up across rural America, and some red state governors would even denounce the current federal government, declare emergencies, and secede in all but name. The new President would order the military in to put down the insurgencies, and large numbers of enlisted personnel and junior officers will mutiny or desert, most joining with local or state forces. The US army would lose 20-30% of it's domestic order of battle, and 10-15% of the officer corps, almost overnight. Rendering it ineffective until it can be reorganized. Right-wing insurgents will take advantage of the confusion, launching additional attacks on federal assets and political enemies. The whole world sees the US becoming ungovernable sparking multiple international crises, which then pin down the US military forces which are still abroad. Johnson steps down to quell the violence, but no one cares. Insurgents from Appalachia and rural Virginia launch repeated strikes against federal infrastructure in DC and Virginia making conduct of basic government functions increasingly impossible. Eventually a constitutional convention is convened in a Midwest town with decent air port and rail line access. Representatives from the red states gather and pass a series of amendments aimed at deconstructing much of the existing political establishment (organizing a new congress, abolishing federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies, etc). These are then ratified by the red states but ignored by blue states and swing states. Formal dissolution of union becomes openly discussed by the political class as the only way to end the crisis, with most of the country (by area) already effectively outside the control of the federal government.

[@ZvalatDa1st]

They are. Believe me, they are

[@theuniverse5173]

Nothing ever happens

[@andrew9371]

until it does

[@BigTomInTheBasement]

@@andrew9371 and then it's bad

[@andrew9371]

@@BigTomInTheBasement history moves like a glacier and then all at once

[@BigTomInTheBasement]

@@andrew9371 some call it logarithmic decay

[@an0nycat]

There is a good book about the USSR: “It was forever. Until it ended.”

[@Finger-E-Mayas]

I think the democrats on the coast would starve. Some liberals think food comes from the supermarket.

[@rickoshay5525]

It was AOC who said that "we don't need farms, because food comes from the store."

[@Finger-E-Mayas]

@@rickoshay5525 🤦

[@bradleybreslin945]

If it got bad enough we'd all fucking starve😂

[@hisroyalfatness8430]

I feel in this scenario that Japan wouldn’t necessarily support the Democratic states. They would probably remain neutral regarding the U.S. infighting; however, I do agree that they would certainly come to the aid of Taiwan and S.K., because not doing so would jeopardize their own security.

[@KraNisOG]

Japan does have a treaty signed with the United States of American that requires both parties to aid each other should conflict arrive. They'd at least claim to support the U.S federal government, but would not send any assistance.

[@1mol831]

Maybe they would support the republicans by sending them some money

[@hisroyalfatness8430]

@@KraNisOG yeah so again, if Trump wins in this scenario Mr Z created: Japan would have to acknowledge it, even if the Democrats cried election fraud (just how all our allies supported Biden even tho the Trump supporters cried election fraud). So Japan would at best acknowledge the Trump regime as being legitimate, but I doubt they would intervene in any significant means. They would have to contend with China and NK. Likewise, our European allies would probably still at least acknowledge that Trump is the legitimate President in this scenario, but might not specifically help his faction.

[@gtrdxz]

Japan is largely conservative, zero chance they'd support the left leaning parties.

[@badgamemaster]

The EU would break down in a civil war... we have enemies inside our borders... And what about India?

[@user-lm9ij9ge1x]

Americans think that the eu is 100% stable 😂

[@jemm113]

@@user-lm9ij9ge1x lol, just now Ireland is looking at some juicy internal conflict over mass (illegal) migration, same with Italy. The entire EU is on a knife’s edge as it keeps importing foreigners. At this point one really good gun smuggler topples the house of cards 😂

[@alganis3339]

@@user-lm9ij9ge1x If the ennemy is at our borders like in this "scenario" the EU will stay very united and will perform way better than in the scenario. Eastern EU (baltic countries and Poland especially) are pushing for a strong military front on the russian border because they are still remembering the soviet rule and they are more often directly affected by Russia (hacking etc). Western EU will follow because of the amount of capital invested in the eastern EU and because they are the founding countries. The main struggle for the EU armies is to be able to coordinate well but the EU have the numbers. People seem to forget that the cold war only ended 30 years ago and before that western and eastern EU were very militarized.

[@NucIear-Gandhi]

What countries within the EU don't like each other?

[@markpukey8]

@@NucIear-Gandhi All of them? Why do you think we had WW I, WW II and several hundred other wars there over the past 1000 years? The recent period post WW-II is quite literally UNIQUE in European history. From 1945 until Asshole Putin invaded Ukraine was the longest period without a war in Europe EVER RECORDED. But on the other hand, as Mark Twain said "'Depend upon it, sir, when a man knows he is to be hanged in a fortnight, it concentrates his mind wonderfully.'" If the US falls into a Civil War, I imagine most of Europe would INSTANTLY set aside their various differences until after we resolved our family fight. Them kicking off their own war at that time would finish making this a global disaster.

[@sahilhossian8212]

Lore of How A Second American Civil War Could Start WW3 momentum 100

[@constantinethecataphract5949]

American bases, carrier strike groups and ballistic submarines don't just stop existing even if the "brain" is not issuing commands. A more interesting question is what happens now that these assets are free to do what they want? Do we see some going rogue like let's say a carrier strike group invading New Zealand or Australia or American troops stationed in foreign bases in let's say Germany or the UK decide to point their barrels at the countries housing them and taking them over?

[@user-sk7zc1fc5u]

Why do you want a civil war?

[@evan448]

this whole video ignored the role of energy flows those red states are a major source of energy not only to blue states but to blue countries mexico, japan, korea and europe broadly are all energy importers from the US gulf states. their concerns would be how they keep the lights on in their own country during an energy crisis. especially if you imagine iran and russia ramp up hostilities. think of the southern strategy around cotton and replace it with lng

[@evan448]

without an alternative supply of gas coming on line the euros will have to come to texas and lousiania begging for fuel to say nothing of food considering how much the red area contributes to global food supplies. the blue doesnt actually make anything that outside countries would want during a crisis. no one will bw investing their money in wall street while america is on fire and you cant exactly trade the latest hollywood movie for bullets. them having a large share of dollars will be irrelevant as no country will want dollars that could end up being worthless when all said and done last time i checked the gold reserves of the country sat in tenessee a red state

[@lastwolflord]

The red states also have more actual factories and weapons manufacturing. And they produce most of the food in the U.S. Good luck getting fed blue states when the rest of the world is at war trying to feed themselves.

[@surfingpenguin2279]

They also ignored how dependent the blue states are on the red states for food

[@markpukey8]

@@surfingpenguin2279 They are not. Most of the red state surplus goes into animal feed for animals in red states. Or is exported. (Thank the Farm Bills for distorting these markets for decades.) There is not nearly as much dependency as you imagine. About the worst of it would be "oh no, I can't have tomatoes! I'll have to have beets or pistachio's instead". It would not be a "hunger" situation anywhere. This of course ignores how "Money + Ports = Imported food" works. The red states would suffer the horror of not enough avocado's for a while. America is ridiculously capable of producing food everywhere.

[@randlebrowne2048]

@@surfingpenguin2279 Cut off internal sources of food, and a city would run out within 72 hours. It would literally take *weeks* , at minimum, for even Blue port cities to replace that food from across the oceans. That's not even considering the fact that the Red states provide about 1/3rd of the world's food exports. If that food stops flowing, prices skyrocket, and the world begins starving.

[@Brody-Aleksander]

War is Hell people cheering for it have lost their mind but at the same time I don't know what other option gen Z have left

[@engineerenginering8633]

what bs are you talking about? How is war the only option

[@Zhtrik]

Is Brody going to inspire the troops, or sit there with his thumb up his…waiting for his Daddy, Brody Senior, to do his work?

[@constantinuslefug2874]

@@engineerenginering8633 How can White people reason with an enemy that wants genocide? We cannot compromise with people who say things like, "this community is too White" and then enact policies to demographically cleanse it. Genocide is genocide. There is no compromising with genocidal maniacs.

[@theodoremccarthy4438]

The other option is to passively accept the steady decline promised by the status quo. That scenario sees US politics become increasingly dominated by a blatantly corrupt oligarchy at the national level while mob violence determines the politics of the major urban centers. National institutions become increasingly dysfunctional and discredited, while local communities become increasingly ruthless and violent in defending their interests from outsiders. Rural, exurban, and suburban communities see a return of the historic American norm of militias and vigilantism, while neighborhoods in the cities are divided between criminal gangs. There is no formally declared war or large set piece battles. Instead local factions fight each other for control of particular resources in asymmetrical/low-intensity conflicts. Regional alliances gradually form in the face of the increasingly ineffectual and irrelevant national government. These alliances eventually formally break way from the central government and either maintain their independence or coalesce into a nationalistic movement which proceeds to secure control over the rest of the country through massacring their ethnic rivals. It's likely war either way. It's just a matter of when it happens and how bad the damage will be. I think many people sense this and subconsciously realize that the sooner we get it over with the less damaging it will be. Hence why so many people seem to be cheering for it.

[@Chris-Smith]

Gen Z can try voting at levels that boomers vote. They are the biggest bloc and yet vote are at something like 15% of the total vote

[@gunsgalore7571]

I think you underestimate how easily most urban areas would fall with the assumption that the Republicans have control over the military. Cities are way easier than rural areas to conquer if you have the manpower and military might. Your past civil war videos have (probably correctly) identified the fact the civilian right stands no chance against the U.S. military, but I think the left's disadvantage is even worse. They have no access to food, and it will only take a couple of days of hunger to cause mass riots and breakdown of civil order. Add artillery and other forces at the right's disposal in this situation and I just don't see how they could stand a chance. At least in rural areas the population is spread-out enough that they can procure their own food, hide, and conduct an actual insurgency. Cities don't have this ability - they're toast without an army. Your "black belt" insurgency also seems questionable, as the black belt's population is not nearly large enough to contend with the surrounding red areas.

[@PeruvianPotato]

And yet, the Red Army won the Russian Civil War due to having control of the cities

[@Steadyaim101]

Do you remember in history class learning about the Sparta-Athens war? Spartan armies sat outside the walls of Athens for a decade trying to siege them out. But Athens could still connect to the ocean and was so economically powerful the city just bought everything they needed. The same would happen here. Trying to siege two coastlines with the best shipping infrastructure in the world and owning ~50% of the USA's economy is a no-go.

[@gunsgalore7571]

@@Steadyaim101 I think your point works in other scenarios, but remember that in this particular scenario the Republicans control the military. They can do a naval blockade, they can pull off airstrikes and artillery fire (which would be brutal in densely-populated areas like New York City, Boston, etc.), things the Spartans did not have at their disposal.

[@Steadyaim101]

@@gunsgalore7571 I think you would be surprised how little the armed forces want to turn on their own people?. Do you think the Pacific fleet based out of San Diego wants to blockade their own families and watch them starve? Also the stereotype of Republican soldier does not hold as true as people want to believe.

[@PeruvianPotato]

@@gunsgalore7571 Too bad the US Navy will probably just side with the leftists and just blockade Texas until surrender

[@9and7]

The left wouldn't stand a chance.

[@gtrdxz]

Its laughable to think those IN those states would all agree with their state. Plus leftism is antigun 🤣

[@deriznohappehquite]

Look at an obesity map and a political map.

[@9and7]

@@deriznohappehquite Not much difference.

[@lxstcheckll9348]

@@deriznohappehquitelook at the political views looking at hormones status such as testerone and dht the masculinizing hormones 😂😂. Look at the domestic manufacturing support, agricultural support and military support tilting in right states and right political views. The left would need outside help highly because their more feminize which mean they rather not want to inflict violence and use rather manipulation. How that wouldn’t work in this scenario so outside assistance would be key.

[@deathdog1392]

​@deriznohappehquite Im 6ft tall and weigh 200lbs. I run marathons and train MMA. According to "statistics," im above the "BMI" and considered "obese". Of all people you think the left would know the problems with the BMI statistic. But of course the left doesn't even understand the smallest facet of the real world at all.

[@Tater_the_tot.First_of_HisName]

It's more likely that something along the line of the Irish "Troubles" or the Italian "Years of lead" could happen

[@MonsieurDean]

"It's more likely to be like the congo crisis"

[@MonsieurDean]

"It's more likely to be like the opium war"

[@MonsieurDean]

"It's more likely to be like the time my uncle rented a shotgun"

[@Mateo-oq7ui]

@@MonsieurDean we dont talk about the time my uncle rented a shotgun...

[@theodoremccarthy4438]

Yeah, just scaled up due the size of the US. The scenario which comes to mind for me is that if just 1% of the gun-owning non-Hispanic White men in the US went out and did something violent over the course of a decade that would be roughly 480,000 violent incidents. If that followed the pattern of the right-wing violence in the decade following 9/11 it would result in almost 35,000 fatalities. And that's before we add in violence from other ethnic groups.

[@morsecode980]

I just don’t see a scenario where the USA survives a 2nd revolution/civil war at all. With how polarized and divided we all are, I often think of mustache man’s quote about Soviet Russia back in the day. Something about “kicking in the door will cause the whole rotten structure to collapse,” except it would actually be true. America is hanging on by a thread, at least if you ask me.

[@Wendeta-hq2cp]

It's true. Same with G l o b a l i s m as a whole.

[@morsecode980]

@@Wendeta-hq2cp What I’m afraid of is we’re rapidly approaching a time where all of humanity is willing to give up their freedoms for security that only globalists claim they can provide.

[@constantinethecataphract5949]

American bases, carrier strike groups and ballistic submarines don't just stop existing even if the "brain" is not issuing commands. A more interesting question is what happens now that these assets are free to do what they want? Unless they all go back to the USA to help stabilize the situation whitch i doubt.

[@matthiuskoenig3378]

@@constantinethecataphract5949 its going to be like the french colonies after 1940. they'll pick sides and do what that side tells them to do.

[@constantinethecataphract5949]

@@matthiuskoenig3378 Problem is that by themselves they can takeover whole countries. There are 3 options here 1 them be loyal and continuing their last command. 2. become a gigantic mercenary force (i see this mostly for foreign bases, they'll just become mercenary forces of the countries that house them unless they don't have the money to pay, in that regard they'll just take it) 3. Take over some countries and rule them as "bases" (i see that option more likely for a carrier strike group)

[@gunsgalore7571]

9:45 I think guerilla warfare used by liberals and Mexicans would not work very well. Mexico's military is... well... not spectacular, and we know how good liberal civilians are likely to be in combat. Especially considering that Republicans would have the vast majority of the military in this scenario, I find it hard to imagine they'd make any progress.

[@lmvr127]

The only Formidable groups; Mexican Marines and the GAFEs would be too busy keeping order in their own country, diplomacy and trade embargoes would only be viable for them

[@fish5671]

@@MrHellknightimpDid you just equate a house slave to a city conservative lmao

[@theodoremccarthy4438]

Z doesn't believe the Republicans would have effective military control. He has a lot of faith in the left's institutional dominance. Even when he concedes the bulk of the military would be aligned with the Republicans in this scenario, he still tries to find a way for the left to win via "alliances".

[@scottyrobot]

what about the bloods and crips and ms13? would they become the defacto liberal footsoldiers?

[@Angl0sax0nknight]

I doubt Mexico would “officially” get involved. The cartels and gangs would be looking out for themselves. Mexico would be very worried that if Republicans will their country is toast. Best to not get involved

[@Brass_Bricks]

It seems like your scenarios usually have some part of Texas getting gobbled up. I think you overestimate Mexico's force projection capabilities (no tanks at all) and motivation, and underestimate just how culturally bloody-minded and heavily armed Texas is, between private arms, Ft. Hood's presence, and the cottage industry of privately owned AFV's and people who arm drones as a hobby. Hell, just privately owned general aviation is 15,000 planes. If it came to that, the fighting would make 1990's Yugoslavia seem gentle.

[@randlebrowne2048]

I don't think that he understands how seriously we Texans actually take the whole "Remember the Alamo" thing. It's literally drilled into our heads in school!

[@naruck15]

Also, the Saudis would probably be neutral, they have interests with the republicans (unless MBS gets replaced), they’re reliant on trade with Russia/China, and they wouldn’t want to lose their diplomatic inroads with the Assad administration or be on the same side as Turkey/Qatar

[@BigTomInTheBasement]

If the USD value craters due to internal US conflicts Saudi won't care to deal with the USA. They'll likely deal with anyone who has real money or can pay and provide them real protection. They're already doing trades in currency other than USD.

[@CantoniaCustoms]

@@BigTomInTheBasement tbf Red America is also rich in resources. Meanwhile Blue America would struggle since their entire wealth is founded on intellectual property (something rendered meaningless by a sly Chinaman with a pen) and financial manipulation (which would be moot with a USD that doesn't matter)

[@1mol831]

@@BigTomInTheBasementthey might work with the Egyptians.

[@merijevons]

I doubt anyone would ally with Israel openly. MBS would be killed if did it (he actually said this), and Erdogan would be deposed in hours. It's a suicidal strategy - beyond idiotic. "But is Iran" - indeed. Probably they would cooperate with it, in exchange of carving their own zones of influence - perhaps even negotiating their acquisitions in Yemen and Syria.

[@JPJ432]

I think you will enjoy this quote from the Russian Foreign Minister Alexander Gorchakov writing to Lincoln in the Autumn of 1862 a year and a half into the Civil War- "You know that the government of United States has few friends among the Powers. England rejoices over what is happening to you; she longs and prays for your overthrow. France is less actively hostile; her interests would be less affected by the result; but she is not unwilling to see it. She is not your friend. Your situation is getting worse and worse. The chances of preserving the Union are growing more desperate. Can nothing be done to stop this dreadful war? The hope of reunion is growing less and less, and I wish to impress upon your government that the separation, which I fear must come, will be considered by Russia as one of the greatest misfortunes. Russia alone, has stood by you from the first, and will continue to stand by you. We are very, very anxious that some means should be adopted-that any course should be pursued-which will prevent the division which now seems inevitable. One separation will be followed by another; you will break into fragments."

[@JPJ432]

Here is another quote I think you will like but from Tsar Alexander II in an Interview after the war: "In the Autumn of 1862, the governments of France and Great Britain proposed to Russia, in a formal but not in an official way, the joint recognition by European powers of the independence of the Confederate States of America. My immediate answer was: "I will not cooperate in such action; and I will not acquiesce. On the contrary, I shall accept the recognition of the independence of the Confederate States by France and Great Britain as a casus belli for Russia. And in order that the governments of France and Great Britain may understand that this is no idle threat; I will send a Pacific fleet to San Francisco and an Atlantic fleet to New York."

[@jodrakhanthewonderful1642]

California's would-be communist revolution would fail due to rural areas of the state being fairly conservative. You'd see San Francisco/Los Angeles get starved out.

[@def3ndr887]

Depends how much aid the dems can pull from overseas

[@Zhtrik]

@@def3ndr887 Which would be very expensive, and prone to disruption if the people protecting the seas(Us),suddenly stopped doing that oh…250 billion a year, project.

[@constantinethecataphract5949]

If those conservatives can coordinate (spoilers they can't) Also the Reds in the Russian civil war had the cities, that didn't stop them from winning in the end.

[@Zhtrik]

@@constantinethecataphract5949 And the left increasingly can’t coordinate either. That gape between the Dems and the College Kids ain’t exactly amenable at this point. All over a country 6000 miles away, fate is artistic.

[@CantoniaCustoms]

@@def3ndr887 Pretty much nil since China would have geopolitical reasons NOT to do that and they don't really produce food as much as the US anyways.

[@Dsquareddyson]

If you think Idaho is turning blue, you have another thing coming

[@PeruvianPotato]

Idk man, Boise is telling me that yeah it would

[@Dsquareddyson]

@PeruvianPotato Moscow's telling me that no it's not ;)

[@user-sk7zc1fc5u]

Idaho isn't completely red or blue. Lots of anti-government libertarians there also.

[@user-sk7zc1fc5u]

@@eaglestryker1338 If I wasn't a 79-year old widower with bad knees and could afford to, I'd move back to Washington state where I once lived for 25 years. The problem is the politics in my state. I don't like government control and I live in probably the number one government controlled state. I am an independent non-Christian where white conservative Christian nationalism is really on the rise, real estate is out of sight, with lots of rich Californians building $million homes on lots of 100 acres and more. When I first moved here 31 years ago, it was conservative but now California conservatives are moving here bringing their culture with them and I don't fit in. I used to hear gunfire a lot but rarely now. There is one tactical firearms center, but few even know about it. I live in a red state, am a gun guy with my own home-built gun range. I know who is bringing all this crap and it isn't the dems, of which there are very few. Next school levy will close two schools and then that will bring us home schools and the government paying for church schools. I was a strong conservative republican until Trump was president. There are two kinds of libertarians---one, like me. doesn't want govt. control but 40% of libertarians want government to force Christian ideas on the population. And we now have states that want be a part of us, but we rural folk (I live in the largest county in my state with 17000 population.) have no say because of metro areas of 100,000 to 450,000, and the more California and Washington moves here the more control cities have over us. And I live in the Panhandle of Idaho. If we have a civil war it will because conservative Christian nationalists want it. There is a guy in Moscow, Idaho, Doug Wilson, who wants to turn what he calls a blue town into a red town at any cost. So far I don't need to carry a firearm into any town even one of 35,000. But if I drove to Moscow, only 2 and a half hours away, I will carry. Almost everybody owns guns in our county but very few open carry. No need to. But the more people open carry, the more people who fear guns are intimidated and what does that do? It makes them want to pass more legislation to confiscate my guns, so why should I open carry and just begin the process of gun grabbing?

[@user-sk7zc1fc5u]

It isn't turning blue, it is turning California Christian conservative government control. I moved here 31 years ago because it was a free state. Not now.

[@TheBuckeyeHistoryGuy1776]

Unlikely Turkey still stays in NATO

[@ZvalatDa1st]

I agree

[@lastwolflord]

Agreed, they only do it now for money. A war happens like this and they start their own wars with Greece and Armenia.

[@1mol831]

Turkey reforms Ottoman Empire

[@TheBuckeyeHistoryGuy1776]

@@ZvalatDa1st erdogan has many times been nicknamed the Turkish Putin

[@georgios_5342]

Turkey attacks all its neighbors the very next day

[@cryhavoc6106]

This guy has too much faith in the cohesion of states. Every state has 2 very different cultures, and peoples.

[@planetarystargazer]

What If The Cold War never happened

[@lervish1966]

It didn't

[@Lucius_Aurelian_]

Then you live in the Kaiserreich timeline

[@Baconcatboy]

Probably would've taken us longer to advance militarily and we would've taken longer to get to the moon.

[@elfastzarate2971]

Today would be Russia and Otan vs India and Chine

[@Shane-zo4mg]

Is this video assuming anything could happen without the CIAs bidding?

[@Jupiter__001_]

Good point. I wonder how much of our understanding of the geopolitics of the 20th and 21st centuries is tainted by their hidden involvement.

[@brycenlanager1216]

The CIA would fund both sides out of sheer habit.

[@cybersaint9710]

​@@brycenlanager1216 😂😂😂

[@ayyybob]

As a saudi, I feel my stomach disgustingly hurting from the thought of KSA helping israel, I'd probably flee to africa in this case to save my life from Iran😶‍🌫️

[@Warrior-14]

Why do you assume that the army would continue to act as a unified force when a civil war breaks out. The army would disintegrate and join various sides

[@massacmongo995]

In your Scenario consider that California would be cut off from much of it's water supply

[@TommyWWIII]

This is the most accurate prediction I've seen yet, not even a conspiracy theory. Our government has run contingency scenarios like this for decades, in every case the world loses regardless of America's outcome.

[@1mol831]

Does the world lose though. It seems Israel, Turkey, Saudi Arabia wins in this scenario, Poland and France wins. But the Baltics, Taiwan, South Korea and Philippines lose. It’s a draw

[@loctitecody7830]

I think you overestimate the discipline, courage and quality of american soldiers in 2024, and you underestimate the skill, experience and determination of veterans from GWOT who are overwhelmingly right wing

[@Wendeta-hq2cp]

He's also forgetting the a r m y is the smallest it's been in years too.

[@theodoremccarthy4438]

He's locked into the first civil war as a model, which has the left winning to due it's control of the more urbanized and industrialized regions of the country. He's incapable of processing just how much the country has changed since that time. He's also fully bought into the notion that the right lacks the will to fight, despite ample evidence to the contrary.

[@PeruvianPotato]

What happens when you play too much HOI4:

[@Wendeta-hq2cp]

@@PeruvianPotato Fr Fr

[@charliechuckles2195]

Guess I'll be outnumbered in that scenario. I'm a GWOT vet and am definitely not right wing

[@drakoslayd]

USA: *has a civil war* UK, still England but with more land: *declares war against France* France: wtf? Uk: sorry force of habit

[@RaisedxFist]

😅😅😅😅

[@robertkidnley93]

There they go again dang Democrats leaving the union again

[@Bluepizza1684]

Oh shit your right lol

[@MonsieurDean]

"HOW MANY TIMES DO WE NEED TO TEACH YOU THIS LESSON OLD MAN"

[@bullmoosevelt4495]

Republicans would 100% never let that down. Lol

[@Angl0sax0nknight]

INSURRECTIONIST! Worst than 911 and Pearl Harbor combined

[@merafirewing6591]

​@@MonsieurDean *Union Dixie intensifies*

[@just.8797]

No side would be innocent

[@PeruvianPotato]

Yep, I can already imagine the war crimes committed on the daily if such a terrible thing were to happen.

[@johnnysilvercloud4470]

@@PeruvianPotatothe greatest war crimes are often found in civil wars

[@jackalnerf6230]

I think you’re overestimating Mexico here, and if they were able to gain ground in Texas it would be in the Nueces Strip not the Guadeloupe Mountains.

[@duncanharrell5009]

Mexico’s military might not be able to do much… but what about the illegal fifth columns here in the states?

[@jackalnerf6230]

@@duncanharrell5009 Tejanos are more likely to identify strongly as Texan than anglos. I don’t see them as a threat to our sovereignty.

[@paciferent]

An interesting thought experiment. I think there are a few key variables missing here. Motivation to fight within the American populace being one. If it's "average blue voter" versus "average red voter" that isn't necessarily an equal fight. Secondly, the side that European democracies would opt for would be dependent on the current state of politics within each nation. For example, who France would've supported 5 years ago could be the polar opposite of who they will support in 5 years time. In fact, I'd go as far as to argue that an American Civil War would cause further Civil Wars in many countries that have already tapped into American polarisation.

[@shantarmanix3275]

The U.S. had no individual income tax established in 1861- so today that would assume people would stop paying taxes, the government would shutdown, and collapse!

[@user-fc7is6jo2e]

Outstanding Analysis! I am also commenting to help your channel with the algorithm because more people need to see your reports.

[@alusteratrocious5936]

I like how in this scenario the democrats do what the Republicans are currently threatening to do. Very neutral stance.

[@realBryanAlejandro]

Every democracy looses in this scenario.

[@dylangtech]

I hate democracy, so this sounds great when you word it like that.

[@EEE-1409]

Good thing it probably won't happen

[@realBryanAlejandro]

@@EEE-1409 The US looses more than any other country in this universe sadly.

[@theodoremccarthy4438]

There's a reason why democracy is a historically rare phenomenon.

[@neondystopian]

It would be interesting to see who brics would support during the conflict. Russia would support the right, ideologically, but not China.

[@angemalaurie6074]

China would do it out of strategical interest as the right is more isolationist

[@splashnskillz37]

Brazil could have fractured support to both sides as it struggles with the political polarisation too, tho not to the point of civil war cuz ppl pretty much live in one already

[@alganis3339]

BRICS is more an economic alliance than a political one. They would maybe push to create a currency to remplace the dollar or they would push to have new members to remplace the US economic domination.

[@RemsHusband]

It's such a strong alliance that two of its members have more or less been at war with each other since the CCP's rise to power.

[@SalMinella]

Great vid I had to rewind several times to make sure I didn’t miss anything.

[@flynvascense9405]

Just remember this is hypothetical and theoretical. We don't know if this is how it would go.

[@danielsantiagourtado3430]

Love your content z! Keep up the good work

[@MonsieurDean]

🫡

[@Namroaruimmase]

@@MonsieurDean Azerbajian same with rule armenia.

[@ac1455]

This is quite literally the only way ww3 can be fought without nuclear Armageddon as nuclear delivery and interception capabilities are too spread out in terms of location to command, and even those sites which are consolidated under the federal government alongside the physical facilities might be much fewer than what we would want in order to retaliate with a strike meaning that if we do use those limited sites on an adversary, there is a chance that it will not be enough and so will not be considered to be used unless others use nukes first. This is quite literally the best outcome for China. Although much of the actual production is done in Taiwan, those are for the Most advanced chips, and they still require globalized trade which would be unsecured with American absence or under hostile powers like China, so they cannot then get new parts or maintain Dutch machinery from ASML, so they would be mostly stuck to the current level of advanced chips, with replacements of those machines possibly taking years to develop. This means that a chip shortage from attacking Taiwan would be limited since they aren’t going to be making as much and as advanced anyways.

[@constantinethecataphract5949]

What if the ballistic submarines decide to just launch the nukes without the fed issuing commands after ww3 starts? Or worse what if carrier strike groups decide either to help Taiwan by themselves without central command or decide to take over the Philippines or Australia/New Zealand or something. Not even mentioning the millitary bases in other countries.

[@connorsimpler3773]

I enjoy this type of content as a complement to your more grounded videos

[@maxtucker7344]

The biggest issue with this prediction is the final west coast territorial map. I don’t think it would be the Rockies as the diving line between the D and R sides it would probably be the cascade and sierras mountain ranges. This is because the Rockies are interspersed with many large flatter areas and have large natural passages through them in Wyoming, Montana, and New Mexico, so they are not as naturally defensive as the cascades. Second while the Rockies and Great Basin area are generally low population it is conservative to very conservative throughout making it a difficult offensive push for any west coast military. Lastly because the cascades and Sierras are so tall and dense there are very few passages one can take so it would be an effective bottleneck for either side to attempt to pass through. Taking that into account I would assume that it would likely stay R controlled or potentially be a no man’s land buffer zone between the R and D sides. Also it’s hard for me to predict the Mexican military would have a lot of military successes on foreign soil when they are ineffective against their own cartels and have very little experience in real wars. I could see a cartel paramilitary group taking over some of the south west way before I could see the Mexican army doing it. I don’t think either side D or R would allow large cities like Tucson or phoenix Arizona to be under Mexican control.

[@theodoremccarthy4438]

Agreed. Z is bending over backwards to hand the left a win here. Probably because he's still cognitively stuck on the Civil War as a model, which also explains why he sees it as a state vs state conflict instead of rural vs urban.

[@nevik2506]

Well said

[@StarBadger07]

Northern blue states rely on red state agriculture and oil industries for food and energy. I don't really think you've thought this through.

[@englishpolishmememan8892]

Man makes a video saying basically "No matter what the right or republicans do, they'll always lose". and you're surprised when he says the most delusional poorly thought out takes?

[@christophergrogan4894]

I do not think the Europeans and Canadians would support a sussesionist group in America. I could be wrong but that would hurt their alliance with the American government.

[@prezzJ]

It would in fact probably bring them here to help the "Modern Day Union" quell the "Modern Day Rebellion" Times of alliances & adversity on a geopolitical scale are different. Europe needs a United America to be their backbone for Military Alliance & Joint Economic strength. Without the US, many countries would've went down rabbit hole after WWII since they were so depleted of any kind of resource or material available to them in their war torn lands at the time. On the other hand, without that demand the US economy would never have bolstered into the spoiled brats of the world we've become today.

[@RemsHusband]

They would be screwed in a situation where Trump was elected. He wants to cut ties with them anyway. It is in the best interest of the EU to support the secessionists in this scenario.

[@crusader2112]

Great video. I’m currently in the process of writing a series of novellas and short stories about a post-collapse scenario in the U.S. Following different characters across the country with their own allegiances and beliefs on what should come next. I finished the first story, now I’m on the next. Peace ✌🏻

[@willster8759]

In your video about a second Civil War in the US me and a guy in the comments talked about a situation similar to this, how a US Civil War could lead to WWIII. Glad to see a video on it. Good video!

[@MrShoulder]

I find this scenario to be rather unlikely, especially considering the fact that you had the democrats rebel in red states (in surrounded cities) and yet did not include the inevitable republican uprisings in blue states (which would encircle democrat cities considering republican domination in rural areas). This would be a walk in the park for the republicans, with or without the democrats receiving foreign aid.

[@United-Nations-Space-Command.]

Can you do an American Civil War video but base it on the 2nd American Civil War in Kaiserreich, where you describe the 4 factions as you would normally do?

[@coalnel3089]

I think in terms of a civil war the most dangerous region is West Virginia. It is very conservative, religious and mountainous making it akin to an American Afghanistan. Moreover it’s proximity to DC means that the Pentagon will do anything to protect the capital. This means it may enact brutal bombing campaigns into WV that may suppress dissent but also may create more of it. It’s a tricky balance that may spiral into a full form Christian Taliban takeover of the region.

[@theodoremccarthy4438]

All of Appalachia is lost to the left is any current Civil War scenario.

[@americaforer1776]

I'm from Pittsburgh Pennsylvania it is the largest metropolitan area in Appalachia if a second civil war pop's off it's going to be like Stalingrad during world War 2 and if try to get to Philadelphia or NYC and go to Chicago you have to go through Pittsburgh

[@mike-mz6yz]

@@americaforer1776 Im from Pittsburgh too, but i don't see it. Pittsburgh is way too isolated to be a left stronghold, plus with how left wing policy's have hurt the city over the last 5 years I'm not sure people would be lining up to fight off their neighboring counties.

[@jakefromstatefarm2947]

Funny enough, West Virginia looks very similar Afghanistan on the map

[@DrHotelMario]

I live right on the WV border in Maryland, and honestly this shit scares me, because i'd essentially be on the front lines.

[@marvinwilliamson811]

Without a stable America, the whole world will fall into chaos. Anarchy will rule

[@watch7966]

Please, make this a series. Exploring the potential outcomes and beginnings of near future American civil war or conflict. Thank you.

[@Aaronschannels]

The northeast is too flat to properly defend, it would most likely fall at some point

[@JoeTheCrusader]

I believe that the republicans in this scenario could take NY up to the Catskills, after that the blue loyalists hold on, but the republicans will take NYC and it's vital ports.

[@MonsieurDean]

>laughs in Vermont meaning green mountains

[@Aaronschannels]

@@MonsieurDean slightly bigger hills*

[@PeruvianPotato]

I will say that the side with the cities are often the ones who wins in civil wars.

[@user-sk7zc1fc5u]

The central Rockies would be even harder to defend, with lots of high mountains and deep canyons.

[@majorleagueminuteman1344]

Amateurs talk tactics. Professionals talk logistics.

[@Kelly-ws2zn]

So in other words a 2nd American civil war would make the world a lot worse than it already is

[@englishpolishmememan8892]

Well not only that but apparently no matter what the right or republicans do, they'll always lose. ...Which totally isn't a mask off moment for this channel to just announce it's purely a democrat/lefty shill channel.

[@moledaddy]

How much of the US military is in North America? How much power can the US Navy project inland domestically? Does the US military even have a doctrine for domestic war? For instance, would they drone strike civilian infrastructure?

[@bullmoosevelt4495]

I highly doubt it would end in a stalemate, especially on those conditions. Mexico would never intervene militarily because it’s too engulfed in its own domestic war with the cartels. At best they might just trade with whichever side they favor more. Canada on the other hand while not dealing with internal instability is simply incapable of doing much simply because it lacks the manpower, and going to war with the Republican faction of the US would be economic suicide.

[@doughsoldier3744]

I have 1 issue you bring up the massive revolves in the southern states but what about Cali 6millon Republicans live in that state thats more than Texas would there not be revolts there as well?

[@user-lj1xm6fq3w]

When have republicans ever did anything U had ur chance in 2020 & hid espescially in jan 21 Its like a cult of couch potatos that talk tough on the net but wont do a thing

[@BrassMaple]

In this theoretical scenario, it is conceivable that Canada would face inherent limitations in its capacity to engage in conventional trench warfare. Its military apparatus would be deemed ill-equipped, with a scarcity of combat-ready forces rendering it incapable of effectively defending even a singular city within the vast prairies. Furthermore, it stands to reason that, under auspicious circumstances facilitating independence or a favourable resolution, the prairie provinces of Canada would likely gravitate towards alignment with a conservative American entity. Such a partnership could be perceived as a pathway to liberation from eastern hegemony.

[@w33btrash69]

"Today military might have shifted from Europe to Asia." *Shows the Philippines* Are you on crack, bro?

[@giovelin]

Im a Republican but looking at who we are siding with here, hell nah 😭

[@Sky-a-Animations]

As a person that's spent significant time in each of the lower 48, Don't underestimate Utah or Idaho

[@user-sk7zc1fc5u]

Idaho's population is concentrated mostly along a river with smaller towns in their Panhandle, plus some population in their north near the Spokane metro area of 45,000. Hard to defend.

[@user-sk7zc1fc5u]

The population of both Utah and Idaho is on the flat areas not the mountains.

[@RemsHusband]

Comparatively speaking, no one lives there.

[@Sky-a-Animations]

They may not have much in terms of population but they're culture is one of preparedness for everything coming down on their heads, tightly knit and organized communities, and becoming very familiar with the natural landscape around them. I guaranty that their population will be more organized, have more fall backs and emergency plans in place than the rest of the country and be the some of the most likely to be able to function in the absence of government and/or the power grid. I could go into great details but I'm not and again I have spent significant time in all of the lower 48 not just Idaho and Utah, but they are not to be underestimated.

[@user-sk7zc1fc5u]

@@Sky-a-Animations You are a bit naive. Now you may know more about Idaho than I do but I have lived in two regions of Idaho, both east and west for a total of 33 years and I am living in Idaho now. Mormons are in the east mostly but just like the rest of the country, young people are more into living the good life than being into preparation. Older Mormons are more into preparation, mainly food stuffs, but younger people are different. The Church keeps members so busy they have little time left for preparation. I am not in their church but I was for 39 years in both Idaho and Washington, so I think I know quite a bit. I live in a very rural area and the people I talk to at various meetings don't talk about civil war or prepping or the coming of Jesus. And when it comes to guns, farmers say that they haven't time to practice, plus they use what few guns they have to shoot predators such as coyotes and wolves. We have conservative California preppers moving here, but very few old timers want their brand of conservatism moving here. I have met a few off-gridders but they aren't necessarily either preppers or survivalists. I'm the only survivalist I know in my area. People here hunt a lot, but they don't buy guns for killing dems. Today I talked for quite a while with a older lady who stores MRE's and says she will blow anyone away who tries to get into her home. She lives in a town of 300, a couple hours north of Boise. She is preparing but didn't seem to know exactly what for. And she is a conservative Christian nationalist, who thinks Trump is nearly perfect. North Idaho where Californians are pouring in due mostly to real estate outfits making videos often bragging about all that are has to offer such as lots of guns and training and wildlife and surroundings and a lot of Christians. I live in the Panhandle but not in North Idaho. Mormons stick together but not quite the way you hope. Mormons used to be in preparation before the 2000's but not so much anymore and they are unlikely to join with non-members being that a leader of any group with many Mormons will be led by the bishop. Currently 20% of Idahoans are Mormon. But 27% are unaffiliated with religion and they aren't a group. Most of this prepping seems to be occurring in the South as does the fear of a coming civil war. The Boise Metro Area has 450,000 people and only 18% are Mormon. So much for lots of community groups to help the conservative people in a war.

[@mateowoetam]

First time I see a scenario where Mexico ends bigger, nice to see from time to time.

[@alangivre2474]

I think this is actually an excelent description.

[@ssg9offical]

This was actually an amazing video and I also know how a 3rd Cold War will play out plus WW4.

[@mathieuleader8601]

nice synth score

[@duncanharrell5009]

Cold War Games by Gabriel Lewis. Recognize it from Armchair Historian’s Bundswehr video

[@Aster-Gastaev]

This is a very interesting scenario, but I do not agree with some points and, most importantly, with the result.

[@RikudoMadaraUchiha]

People also act like Poland wouldn't make their own play for Ukraine also. I don't think they make an alliance with them

[@jasonm949]

I've experienced many civil wars both as a member of the US military, and working in the private sector overseas. People who look forward, and wish for one here, on either side are insane in my book. They have no idea.

[@nickr0785]

Love how people overlook millions of gun owners that are on the same page.. never underestimate the will of the people to be free

[@constantinethecataphract5949]

Even if there is a civil war in the USA. That doesn't mean that foreign American bases, carrier strike groups and ballistic submarines just stop doing their work. The government might be in a disray but you bet that the "body" will still do it's function. A more interesting idea is what happens now that these assets are free to do what they want? Do we see them some going rogue like let's say a carrier strike group invading New Zealand or Australia. Or American troop in foreign bases in let's say Germany or the UK decide to point their barrels at the countries housing them and taking them over as a petty kingdoms.

[@theodoremccarthy4438]

It's far more likely they would seek repatriation while their local hosts try to persuade them to stay and bolster their own forces. This would lead to many in the regular US military effectively deserting to become mercenaries.

[@nevik2506]

1st paragraph, good point 2nd paragraph, thought provoking what ifs

[@constantinethecataphract5949]

@@theodoremccarthy4438 Mercenaries but with the power to take over whole countries. Lol. There are also another scenario especially for countries that aren't as loyal to the American world order but still have bases (let's say Turkey or something) to either try to integrate the equipment and the people with the technical knowledge in their own armed forces or try to seize them by force. Ofcourse that only works for the bases. The carrier groups will be a different story maybe some countries like Australia or Taiwan or South korea will "invite" them and turn them into a giant Mercenary force to protect them. Maybe for Australia they'll get integrated in the country because they are both anglo saxon countries?

[@theodoremccarthy4438]

@@constantinethecataphract5949 Yeah, Australia and NV would have the best results at simply recruiting and integrating local US forces. US assets in South east Asia will probably look to them as new "home" countries.

[@CantoniaCustoms]

Without a supply line they'd be a useful asset assiting Japan but they wouldn't last too long.

[@RedcoatHistory-gj7xf]

Would there be any chance of any sort of reactionary uprising in any other countries due to the outbreak of such a war, for example in the UK a while ago there was controversy over the possibility of conscription being introduced if war with Russia broke out and lots of people where saying they would outright refuse the draft and would just rather go to prison. Could civil disobedience such as this on a massive scale lead to some sort of long term uprising or would such actions be quickly stomped out.

[@gingerquinn4263]

Part 2 please

[@Tejano12398]

5:39 it’s important to consider that Mexico could use its diaspora that lives in Texas New Mexico Arizona Colorado Nevada to rebel against the states governments and calls from Mexican politicians to annex Texas And The Southwest States would rise within the Mexican population and Government as those States could give Mexico potential to become a World Economic Power Status and rise out of poverty in which it turn Mexico into a Developed Country and possibly a World Power in which it would be respected by other Latin American Countries and other Countries he’ll even Mexico could invite Central America Cuba To Join them with the Support to rebuild Central America and Cuba with a developed Mexico the country would become a World and economic Power surpassing Brazil Japan Russia Germany uk France

[@dasuta5047]

The kleptocracy that is Mexico could never properly integrate Texas or any of the border states.

[@Tejano12398]

@@dasuta5047 true because there’s going to be differences between the States what would happened is that That the Mexican Government would have to spilt Texas so that they wouldn’t rebel like they did during the Texas revolution they would likely give south Texas land to the Mexican State Of Tamaulipas Coahuila and West Texas would be given to Chihuahua the the former Gadsden Purchase land Would Be given to Sonora and Chihuahua I don’t know about Baja California but I imagine that the government would merge Tijuana and San Diego Together thus The metropolitan Area of San Diego-Tijuana becoming one of the largest Cities in the World New Mexico would be spilt into two States it’s possible that they might rename Cities in the Southwest like Austin to Agustin or Galveston to Santa Fe De Galveston or like Mendoza for Dallas Houston would be magnolia or Iturbide

[@majorsynthqed7374]

One thing that would reunite Americans is a perceived or real threat from outside. Mexico would be foolish to try to regain any former territory. A unified America might use that as an excuse to invade Mexico, smash the cartels...and while there, reclaim the oil production that was nationalized by the Mexican government years ago.

[@mathieuleader8601]

I can see the hypothetical country of the Republic of Lakotah being made reality in this timeline

[@catalyst772]

you forgot that Romania would probably unite or annex moldova and the former parts of moldova that are now parts of ukraine, simmilar to poland

[@Mike-Olds-1]

I think that is a pretty accurate prediction we will see in a few months

[@ThunderRod]

I'm surprised you said nothing about Vietnam

[@sissy-_-fnyc]

The western states are only blue sporatically along the coast. SW Oregon is Red, as is much of Northern California. If conflict broke out, those dividing lines would look a lot more like the presidential election map by county than this one. IMO. Cities would suffer the most from the broken food chain. And you saw what happened in Port Au Prince.

[@theodoremccarthy4438]

The urban riots in red states will be far easier to put down than the rural insurgencies the blue states would face. If the blue states are lucky they would just lose control of their rural areas. If they are unlucky the conflicts would escalate into loose sieges of the cities; with power lines, rail lines, bridges, water supplies, and food shipments coming under regular attack. Z is stuck in viewing military conflict solely in model of the first civil war and the world wars, which were conventional wars fought between organized militaries. He'd do better to study the chaotic ethnopolitical conflicts which are common across history.

[@Chris-Smith]

@@theodoremccarthy4438 If I hear one more right winger tell me about how rural farmers will begin a taliban style insurgency against a military, Im gonna lose it

[@nevik2506]

I agree with you how it should be looked at by county rather than state. Even Texas has blue areas.

[@simonacerton3478]

@@Chris-Smith Begin? Never. The Left will start that Reply? Possibly . An insurgency will actually be suburban mostly though it may end up with regular attacks on food and infrastructure by both sides . As the militia right says Bosnia x Rwanda

[@briandesoto7587]

If you want to see how cities will fare in conflict just look back to when blue cities fell to chaos after natural disasters. Cities require a supply chain to keep them stocked up on supplies. Also in more rural areas if your closes neighbor is 45 minutes away, you have to be self sufficient in a multitude of potential disasters.

[@Americanbadashh]

Even in this scenario China going after Taiwan would end with China worse off. As Taiwan would be even more likely to destroy their microchip factories, if there was no US to defend them. In doing so this would cripple China who is reliant on those chips for basically everything and would also cripple the rest of the world as well.

[@georgios_5342]

11:50 in this scenario, Iran would be forced to cede large areas in its Northwest to Turkish-friendly Azerbaijan

[@josepabloamadornieto7794]

you lost me on Mexican forces.

[@BadCompanyGaming]

Rebuttal: China and Russia backing a right wing insurgency in the US won't lead to WW3 for the same reason why Libya backing the IRA, didn't cause the Brits to invade them.

[@lmvr127]

@@MissCleo24China backs leftists, Russia backs whoever wants good relations with them, which happen to be left wing parties.

[@MonsieurDean]

Did you watch the video?

[@BadCompanyGaming]

@@MonsieurDean I did, and the problem the video is assuming a conventional war of succession, which is more unrealistic than an insurgency-given that the US army sucks at counterinsurgency. If Russia and China wanted to back an right wing insurgency in the US, can have their agents smuggle via Mexico. Since Mexico is overrun by drug cartels and we happen to have an issue with drugs entering the country, it wouldn't be hard for Russia to smuggle and arm right wing militias with Igla AA missiles. Besides, China and North Korea have done business with the cartels. Where do you think the cartels get their RPGs from? Of course these aren't the only issues with your video on why "RiGhT wInG InSuRgEnCy wOUlD LoSe", for example: your assumption that the US military will cause zero civilian casualties (warcrime or collateral) and that the civilian population will turn on the insurgents over the civilian casualties caused by the US military, despite reality and experience suggesting that any one civilian killed by federal government will give the right wing insurgents 10 fighters and boost support, while left faces a PR backlash from both American public and international community. The right could then beat the left, by painting the left as "baby killers" and "warcriminals" while proposing that the only solution to the conflict, is a peace deal with an outcome that benefits them. Exactly what Sinn Fein did, during the Troubles. Reality is the left would lose the civil war, especially if they're the ones doing the counterinsurgency (see my comment on your last video on this subject).

[@officialzji1828]

Just hope and pray that a scenario like this won't become a reality.

[@hatheos]

I wonder how making use of tactical nukes would change the game in a possible civil war?